User:Giamirra/sandbox

'''100% Good work! (+=correct, ++=extra credit -=incorrect ~=half credit)'''

My Mid-Term Quiz for LIBY 1210-09 Spring 2017

My Research Topic is: Music Affects On Mood.

Key words related to my Research Topic are:

Part 1:

Examine Wikipedia articles that are directly related to your Research Topic and select a substantive article to evaluate. This could be an article about an idea (e.g., I might choose the one about Trance) or a person (if I were researching Reggae music, I might pick Bob Marley). Answer the following questions:

?I chose to read and evaluate the article titled: (for extra credit, link the name of the article to the article in Wikipedia.)

+1. Is there a warning banner at the top of the article?

No

If there is a warning banner, copy and paste the warning banner here.

Write an brief explanation of the reason the issues mentioned in the warning banner are important. For example, if the issue is “needs additional citations for verification,” why does that matter?

+Warning banners are very important because for example its letting the reader know that not 100% of the information might be valid and to proceed with caution.

Please note: If the article you are evaluating does not have a warning banner, choose a warning banner from a different article and explain the warning that is in that banner.

+2. Is the lead section of the article easy to understand? Does it summarize the key points of the article?

Yes it is fairly easy to read; i do not think anyone will have difficulty reading this. It does what is intended and does summarizes and explain main points and definitions.

+3. Is the structure of the article clear? “Are there several headings and subheadings, images and diagrams at appropriate places, and appendices and foonotes at the end?”

+4. Are “the various aspects of the topic balanced well”? That is does it seem to provide a comprehensive overview of the topic?

Yes their is many headings and subheadings to make everything easy and organized. The paragraphs are fairly equal so you get as much information about each topic. They also did insert footnotes as well although missing few citations.

+5. Does the article provide a “neutral point of view”? Does it read like an encyclopedia article instead of a persuasive essay?

Since this is a more universal topic that many have a similar definition for i find that it is quite straightforward and gives the closest to a neutral point of view verses a persuasive view.

+6. Are the references and footnotes citing reliable sources? Do they point to scholarly and trustworthy information? Beware of references to blogs; look for references to books, scholarly journal articles, government sources, etc.

These footnotes that are provided are from sources that are trustworthy and credible cites. The few i looked at were from the new york times and all edu websites.

7. Look for these signs of bad quality and comment on their presence or absence from the article you are evaluating:

+a. is the lead section well-written, in clear, correct English?

In my opinion, yes

+b. are there “unsourced opinions” and/or “value statements which are not neutral”?

Their are some unsourced footnotes of statements made, but no opinions.

+c. does the article refer “to ‘some,’ ‘many,’ or other unnamed groups of people,” instead of specific organizations or authors or facts?

In few parts the word many is used. they did specify a bit but once faced with three or more they began to use the phrase "and many more.." which made the research more vague

.

+d. does the article seem to omit aspects of the topic?

Not any that i spotted. Music is a huge topic so i think they covered the whole foundation on what it is and origin but, of course it will not go in depth about every single type of genre and those origins because that would be such a large plethora of information.

+e. are some sections overly long compared to other sections of similar importance to the topic?

Sure, they are not all exactly the same length but for Wikipedia articles i think they are similar in length with each other to correspond a bit.

+f. does the article lack sufficient references or footnotes?

Not in the beginning but as you start scrolling down you lose the amount of references and footnotes.

+g. Look at the “View History” for the article. As you read the conversation there, do you see hostile dialogue or other evidence of lack of respectful treatment among the editors?

Their is no sign of disrespect towards writers but there are few grammar errors that were pointed out and many Citation errors that were fixed in the past writings.

__________________________

Part 2:

Evaluate the Wikipedia article you selected using the CARDIO method. Write your answers following each word below:

+Currency (When was the last update of this article? hint: check the View History)

The last update on this was April 6th, 2017

+Authority (What evidence do you find that the author(s) of this article have the appropriate credentials to write on this topic?)

That on the citations they do have are mainly from edu websites which are very resourceful and trustworthy.

+Relevance (to your research topic)

I do think this is somewhat relevant since it does go deeper into what music consists of, but i do think that i need a more direct and more complex article more focused on how music influenced mood and not just what music is.

+Depth

This is a in depth article but vague for what i need it for in my paper.

+Information Format (I hope this one will be easy for you.)

This is a Tertiary source and also a research article.

+Object (what is the purpose for creating this article?)

To inform others on what music is and the foundation and background on how it came to be.